7 ms·

I really don't see why it should be illegal or even morally questionable at all to target ads at young or old people. It's what everyone already does with extra

I really don't see why it should be illegal or even morally questionable at all to target ads at young or old people. It's what everyone already does with extra steps (TV timeslots, picking certain magazines) and it doesn't make sense to make a company waste money including 20 year olds in their Medicare supplement ad targeting.

kube-system 6y ago
I feel like it depends on the product. There are, for instance, more strict laws regarding the ways that financial institutions can lend money because of historical issues with unfair discrimination. And regarding things like that, it makes a lot of sense. https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0347-your-equal-credit-opportunity-rights https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0347-your-equal-credit...
reaperducer 6y ago
I really don't see why it should be illegal or even morally questionable at all to target ads at young or old people. It's not. But what you're positing is a gross oversimplification of the situation. Nobody says you have to advertise toys in AARP Magazine. But there are federal rules governing the advertising of certain products, such as credit cards. That's what's happening here.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Natsu 6y ago
This one really confused me, too. Can kids even get credit cards?
- AuryGlenz 6y ago
  I got one when I was 12, but that was also 20 years ago now. It was a business card and had a credit limit of $8,000. My parents weren’t on the card. It confused me then almost as much as it confuses me now. Maybe their income counted as household income? I got it because they didn’t like to use their credit cards online. I used it to buy my own PC.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ChrisRR 6y ago
    Jesus, how can you allow a 12 year old to rack up $8000 in debt?
    - Bjartr 6y ago
      Ultimately, I don't think minors can legally enter such a contract, so if he did rack up debt and the card company pursued it, it might have been dismissable if his age then came to light.
      - AuryGlenz 6y ago
        Well, that could have been a fun spree. They must have asked my date of birth, though.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - vxNsr 6y ago
    You signed up online or in person at a bank? What did you say your “business” was?
    - AuryGlenz 6y ago
      This was long enough ago that I believe it was over the phone, and I don't remember. I wonder if I squeaked.
clort 6y ago
What I think is different about targeted online advertising is that the ads targeted at specific groups may never be visible to other groups. A company can outright lie to a pre-selected group who they consider do not have the knowledge, skill or time to counter the lies. There is a non-zero chance that TV timeslots are seen by people not in the targeted group. A billboard in a school zone may have a high chance of being seen by naive young moms but the canny young moms will also see it, along with dads and grandparents picking up kids, not to mention hundreds of other people who live and work in the area. > it doesn't make sense to make a company waste money except it does, to keep them accountable
- cheph 6y ago
  I get outright scam ads on YouTube, from YouTube once a week at least, and nothing ever happens to make them stop because I don't care enough to invest the insane amount of effort it will take to reach someone at YouTube that would care enough to stop it. And then the next outright scam add will pop up. So I am not sure by what mechanism this accountability functions if it can't stop blatant scams on YouTube adds.
  - MathCodeLove 6y ago
    You can report them fairly quickly, there should be a "report" button directly on/under the ad itself. I'm not sure how effective it is at stopping these sort of ads, but it is a step you can easily take.
    - gnud 6y ago
      I've never reported a Youtube ad, but I have reported two Facebook ads that lied in their displayed URL. The the ads were for scummy "wonder-supplements", but displayed the URL of a newspaper that had nothing to do with the ad, I guess to try and get some legitimacy. I couldn't write what was wrong with the ad in my report, only choose from some very broad categories, and both the reports were rejected with "ad is not in voilation of our guidelines". I've stopped reporting lying Facebook ads. And I doubt Google does this much better.
    - 6y ago
ksec 6y ago
Modern day politics thinks All Tracking and Targeting are morally wrong. And anything against that are politically incorrect. This isn't just Twitter or Social Media, it is mainstream media also painting the same picture. A perception question: if the New York Times records every story I read on the site in the last month as a registered user, and uses that to determine what ads it shows me, is that 'tracking'? Out of 5,877 vote, 83% thinks that is "tracking". Which means in the modern day perception, any observation with regards to its user or anyone will be considered as "tracking". Which violate their privacy. The modern day usage of "privacy" has been twisted to mean more like anonymous. All thanks to Apple's PR.
- Bjartr 6y ago
  How is recording, as you put it, distinct from tracking?
  - ksec 6y ago
    Let's assume they are the same in literal sense. The problem is the current trend is about Zero Tracking, which means in the above example NYT could not even record the article their user have read on their site. And it was a poll from Benedict Evans. [1], Thanks to him there is at least some sanity still on the internet. [1] https://twitter.com/benedictevans/status/1387414650443141120 https://twitter.com/benedictevans/status/1387414650443141120
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  It is an overly broad and reductive concept but there is an implicit carve out - if it is literally required for the function. Putting aside the protocol captain obvious level of "a computer needs to know when your IP address asked for it to send the webpage to you" level, an online store with no tracking of transactions would be a useless mock up. No payments would be placed nor orders delivered.
paul_f 6y ago
What if Facebook created a look-alike audience for a reverse mortgage product, and turns out it never showed it to anyone under 30. Did facebook just violate their own policy? But it's OK because an algorithm did it?

kube-system 6y ago

I feel like it depends on the product. There are, for instance, more strict laws regarding the ways that financial institutions can lend money because of historical issues with unfair discrimination. And regarding things like that, it makes a lot of sense. https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0347-your-equal-credit-opportunity-rights https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0347-your-equal-credit...

reaperducer 6y ago

I really don't see why it should be illegal or even morally questionable at all to target ads at young or old people. It's not. But what you're positing is a gross oversimplification of the situation. Nobody says you have to advertise toys in AARP Magazine. But there are federal rules governing the advertising of certain products, such as credit cards. That's what's happening here.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Natsu 6y ago

This one really confused me, too. Can kids even get credit cards?

AuryGlenz 6y ago
I got one when I was 12, but that was also 20 years ago now. It was a business card and had a credit limit of $8,000. My parents weren’t on the card. It confused me then almost as much as it confuses me now. Maybe their income counted as household income? I got it because they didn’t like to use their credit cards online. I used it to buy my own PC.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ChrisRR 6y ago
  Jesus, how can you allow a 12 year old to rack up $8000 in debt?
  - Bjartr 6y ago
    Ultimately, I don't think minors can legally enter such a contract, so if he did rack up debt and the card company pursued it, it might have been dismissable if his age then came to light.
    - AuryGlenz 6y ago
      Well, that could have been a fun spree. They must have asked my date of birth, though.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- vxNsr 6y ago
  You signed up online or in person at a bank? What did you say your “business” was?
  - AuryGlenz 6y ago
    This was long enough ago that I believe it was over the phone, and I don't remember. I wonder if I squeaked.

clort 6y ago

What I think is different about targeted online advertising is that the ads targeted at specific groups may never be visible to other groups. A company can outright lie to a pre-selected group who they consider do not have the knowledge, skill or time to counter the lies. There is a non-zero chance that TV timeslots are seen by people not in the targeted group. A billboard in a school zone may have a high chance of being seen by naive young moms but the canny young moms will also see it, along with dads and grandparents picking up kids, not to mention hundreds of other people who live and work in the area. > it doesn't make sense to make a company waste money except it does, to keep them accountable

cheph 6y ago
I get outright scam ads on YouTube, from YouTube once a week at least, and nothing ever happens to make them stop because I don't care enough to invest the insane amount of effort it will take to reach someone at YouTube that would care enough to stop it. And then the next outright scam add will pop up. So I am not sure by what mechanism this accountability functions if it can't stop blatant scams on YouTube adds.
- MathCodeLove 6y ago
  You can report them fairly quickly, there should be a "report" button directly on/under the ad itself. I'm not sure how effective it is at stopping these sort of ads, but it is a step you can easily take.
  - gnud 6y ago
    I've never reported a Youtube ad, but I have reported two Facebook ads that lied in their displayed URL. The the ads were for scummy "wonder-supplements", but displayed the URL of a newspaper that had nothing to do with the ad, I guess to try and get some legitimacy. I couldn't write what was wrong with the ad in my report, only choose from some very broad categories, and both the reports were rejected with "ad is not in voilation of our guidelines". I've stopped reporting lying Facebook ads. And I doubt Google does this much better.
  - 6y ago

ksec 6y ago

Modern day politics thinks All Tracking and Targeting are morally wrong. And anything against that are politically incorrect. This isn't just Twitter or Social Media, it is mainstream media also painting the same picture. A perception question: if the New York Times records every story I read on the site in the last month as a registered user, and uses that to determine what ads it shows me, is that 'tracking'? Out of 5,877 vote, 83% thinks that is "tracking". Which means in the modern day perception, any observation with regards to its user or anyone will be considered as "tracking". Which violate their privacy. The modern day usage of "privacy" has been twisted to mean more like anonymous. All thanks to Apple's PR.

Bjartr 6y ago
How is recording, as you put it, distinct from tracking?
- ksec 6y ago
  Let's assume they are the same in literal sense. The problem is the current trend is about Zero Tracking, which means in the above example NYT could not even record the article their user have read on their site. And it was a poll from Benedict Evans. [1], Thanks to him there is at least some sanity still on the internet. [1] https://twitter.com/benedictevans/status/1387414650443141120 https://twitter.com/benedictevans/status/1387414650443141120
Nasrudith 6y ago
It is an overly broad and reductive concept but there is an implicit carve out - if it is literally required for the function. Putting aside the protocol captain obvious level of "a computer needs to know when your IP address asked for it to send the webpage to you" level, an online store with no tracking of transactions would be a useless mock up. No payments would be placed nor orders delivered.

paul_f 6y ago

What if Facebook created a look-alike audience for a reverse mortgage product, and turns out it never showed it to anyone under 30. Did facebook just violate their own policy? But it's OK because an algorithm did it?